From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 00:09:51 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] Uboot and ARM SMP support In-Reply-To: <4A43955B.7020808@windriver.com> References: <20090625071432.GD11470@game.jcrosoft.org> <366f00c80906250038v48f7aa28hf3b653dcd47b178a@mail.gmail.com> <20090625081012.GE11470@game.jcrosoft.org> <366f00c80906250211k68b0227eh974142af598d1dc7@mail.gmail.com> <4A4347BD.9090903@gmail.com> <20090625124417.GG11470@game.jcrosoft.org> <4A438664.1010703@gmail.com> <4A43955B.7020808@windriver.com> Message-ID: <20090625220951.GI23174@game.jcrosoft.org> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 10:18 Thu 25 Jun , Tom wrote: > Nishanth Menon wrote: > >Shilimkar, Santosh said the following on 06/25/2009 04:51 PM: > > >> > >>So essentially u-boot would be almost same as Cortex-A8 except you should avoid programming AuxControl > >>register because the bit definitions are different. > >> > >>Hope this helps > >so how would the new arch look like? do we do: > >cpu/arm_cortexa8_9 and common code there? > Given my recent experience with common code for i2c on omp24xx and omap3, > I would prefer if they were separate and had no common code. no sorry I'm bored to copy & paster of code everywhere specialy on arm > > cpu/arm_cortexa8 > cpu/arm_cortexa9 I do not want to see this anymore > > So A8 can be more easily maintained. it will be a mess on start.S for 2 or 3 specific code line so no > As A9 matures, it will diverge more from A8. for now I think merge them make more sense if it will require in the futur to separte them we will see but for now no Best Regards, J.